Search results

Economic as well as ethical aspects of discrimination and other forms of injustice in the context of a nation’s economy have been discussed by scholars for many decades. However, until relatively recent times, much attention has not been given – especially by economists – to discrimination and injustice in the international context. At least since 1961, several works in Catholic social thought have addressed the issues of injustice as well as poverty and inequality among countries. Discusses the social economics of discrimination and other forms of injustice in the international context. After a brief introduction, presents some views on injustice in the international economy and some empirical evidence. Briefly discusses the way mainstream economics mostly avoids discussion about injustice. Follows by looking at social economists’ perspective on injustice, also giving remarks on how some documents comprising Catholic social thought discuss injustice in the context of international development. Concludes with observations on how distribution/justice issues could be incorporated in discussions dominated by growth/development objectives.

Economic development, as contrasted from “growth” (in the sense of increase in GNP) has been a subject of interest for less than 50 years. Divergent, perhaps even conflicting views, are expressed on the question of what constitutes, or should constitute, the end‐product of economic development. The article discusses some of the issues relevant to this debate.

Anghel Rugina has written extensively on several topics of interest to social economists. Many of his ideas seem to have been influenced by his education and experiences first in Romania and then in Germany, where he did post‐doctoral work with Walter Eucken. In 1950 he emigrated to the United States where he taught at three different universities. His published works reveal a fascination for, but not an entirely sympathetic or uncritical view of, the writings of Walras, Marx and Keynes (among others). Eucken was a source of inspiration for him and it was probably during Rugina's association with Eucken at the University of Freibrug i.Br. during 1944–1948 that what Rugina later called “a new research programme” was conceived.

Discusses the Dymski and Elliott scheme of meanings of exploitation in the context of workers and owners of capital within a country as extended (with some variations) to a discussion of exploitation in the international setting. The international dependence model can be, and has been interpreted as an extension of Marxist theory (where owners of capital dominate the workers as well as the national economy) to the global economy where developed countries and multinational corporations operating therefrom dominate the economies of the developing countries.

Is there such a field as social economics? Let us begin by providing some justification (the sceptics may call this rationalisation) for asking the question. The very fact that we are gathered here in Fresno ought to be a reassurance that, indeed, there does exist such a field. But this reassurance amounts to little more than a Descartian feeling of, “I think, therefore I am”. Some people question implicitly or explicitly whether there is such a field of enquiry called social economics. If you think this statement needs empirical support, consider the following:

It is a pleasure and a privilege to participate in this special session to honour George F. Rohrlich, social economist. It is with a sense of humility that I accept this pleasant undertaking. George Rohrlich has taught, written, helped others to write, published, helped others to publish and edited works on different aspects of social economics. I attempt here to put together a few observation on the nature of social economics as revealed in his writings. This attempt is by its very nature a modest one. For, how can one do justice to the work of a man who has to his credit a dozen major works (books or monographs) and almost five dozen other writings (articles, papers, notes) not all of them in English? I do not, therefore, even pretend to take a comprehensive view of Rohrlich, the social economist.

India was a colony of Great Britain until 1947 when the subcontinent was partitioned into two politically separate and independent countries: India and Pakistan. The partition resulted in a major political and economic upheaval in the subcontinent. In 1950, a planning commission was set up to determine priorities and co‐ordinate Indian economic development. The system has been called a “mixed economy” as opposed to either a centrally planned economy or an essentially free marketdriven system. Over the years, the principal objectives of planned development have been to build up within a democratic context: (1) a rapidly expanding and technologically progressive economy, and (2) a social order based on justice and offering equal opportunity to every person. Several of the achievements and the problems faced in the course of the development effort are discussed.

To understand John Paul II’s vision of the social economy, it is important to put his writings in a historical perspective. This essay offers a brief survey of Catholic social thought on the topic of justice in the context of international development as reflected in several of the important publications from the Vatican during the years 1961‐1991. We have included the views of Pope John XXIII in encyclicals Mater et Magistra and Pacem in Terris, of the Second Vatican Council in Gaudium et Species, Pope Paul VI in Populorum Progressio and Octogesima Adveniens and of Pope John Paul II in the encyclicals Laborem Exercens, Sollicitudo Rei Socialis and Centesimus Annus.

Although markets prevail throughout the world, there are significant differences in the economic, social, political as well as legal institutions in which these markets function. Many of these variations can be attributed in part to differences in levels of economic development and in part to the differing consensus about the role of corporations and of governments in the various countries. The paper compares the models of private market economy and social market economy. An understanding of the rules underlying private market economy and those governing social market economy is important in the context of of the evoloving new global economic architecture.

Notes that the 1991 Papal Encyclical, Centesimus Annus, emphasizes the role of justice in the economic and social order of the global economy and that it calls for effective international agencies which would oversee and direct the economy to the common good in relation to the whole human family. Focuses on challenging questions posed by the call relating, for example, to the significance of having a just world economy and the role of existing institutions in its promotion. Initiates a discussion relating to such issues. Reviews the views expressed in some of the Papal Encyclicals on relevant economic issues. Discusses some problems relating to international development, and presents a discussion on some aspects of economic justice together with some welfare implications of economic theory. Describes attributes of an international monetary regime, followed by a presentation of a selective set of empirical observations. Briefly discusses international dependence theory, and exploitation in the international context. Finally, offers some concluding observations.